Home
ACROSS THE POND – LESSONS FROM THE US ON INTEGRATED HEALTHCARE
Richard Gleave
The Nuffield Trust - London UK
Click the link below to download
http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/members/download.aspx?f=%2fecomm%2ffiles%2fAcross_the_pond_210109.pdf&a=skip
“……….This report starts by exploring the differences between the conceptual models of integration between the UK and the US and then identifies potential lessons for the NHS from the US experience under three headings – integrated governance, risk management and the use of incentives, and the role of integrated information
technology.
The experience of larger integrated systems, especially the Veterans Health Administration and Kaiser Permanente California regions, has had a significant influence on the policy debate about integrated care in the UK. However, the potential lessons from the medium-sized and smaller integrated systems and other network models that are working to develop integrated delivery has not been extensively covered in the literature.
This report draws on a detailed piece of qualitative research into performance improvement systems in four such systems (see Box 1) and on meetings with the leaders of a range of network organisations from around the US. The four case studies were selected using a purposive sampling frame informed by expert opinions. They were also chosen because they had core features that were common between the sites to enable meaningful comparison – thus all four case studies were not-for-profit integrated systems with a plan and physicians under single or quasi-single ownership.
However, the four locations had different business models and governance systems, which allowed for insightful contrasts to be identified. For example, the sites had different relationships between the health plan and the delivery system, including both ‘closed systems’, where only patients who were members of the health plan were entitled to access the delivery system, to ‘open systems’ where the doctors and hospitals would treat patients from with any insurance plan. The case studies also varied in the degree of direct management control over the hospitals, which ranged from a long-term close contractual relationship to direct line management….”
Content:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
DIVIDED BY A COMMON LANGUAGE – INTEGRATION IN THE UK AND US
INTEGRATED GOVERNANCE
RISKS AND INCENTIVES
IT AND INTEGRATION
POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR THE NHS
CONCLUSION
Richard Gleave
The Nuffield Trust - London UK
Click the link below to download
http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/members/download.aspx?f=%2fecomm%2ffiles%2fAcross_the_pond_210109.pdf&a=skip
“……….This report starts by exploring the differences between the conceptual models of integration between the UK and the US and then identifies potential lessons for the NHS from the US experience under three headings – integrated governance, risk management and the use of incentives, and the role of integrated information
technology.
The experience of larger integrated systems, especially the Veterans Health Administration and Kaiser Permanente California regions, has had a significant influence on the policy debate about integrated care in the UK. However, the potential lessons from the medium-sized and smaller integrated systems and other network models that are working to develop integrated delivery has not been extensively covered in the literature.
This report draws on a detailed piece of qualitative research into performance improvement systems in four such systems (see Box 1) and on meetings with the leaders of a range of network organisations from around the US. The four case studies were selected using a purposive sampling frame informed by expert opinions. They were also chosen because they had core features that were common between the sites to enable meaningful comparison – thus all four case studies were not-for-profit integrated systems with a plan and physicians under single or quasi-single ownership.
However, the four locations had different business models and governance systems, which allowed for insightful contrasts to be identified. For example, the sites had different relationships between the health plan and the delivery system, including both ‘closed systems’, where only patients who were members of the health plan were entitled to access the delivery system, to ‘open systems’ where the doctors and hospitals would treat patients from with any insurance plan. The case studies also varied in the degree of direct management control over the hospitals, which ranged from a long-term close contractual relationship to direct line management….”
Content:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
DIVIDED BY A COMMON LANGUAGE – INTEGRATION IN THE UK AND US
INTEGRATED GOVERNANCE
RISKS AND INCENTIVES
IT AND INTEGRATION
POLICY IMPLICATIONS FOR THE NHS
CONCLUSION
» Video for our MPH colleagues. Must watch
» Salam
» Feeling Sad
» Look here. Its 2020 and this is what we found
» Sad News
» Pakistan Demographic Profile 2018
» Good evening all fellows
» Urdu Poetry